2GodBDGlory

I think there's some of each. Certain sets use the official logos and everything, so I'd assume they're licensed, while others go by a non-descript name and don't use logos.

Wow! Slow or not, that's a cool link. I didn't realize they shared all their instructions like that!

I ran a review on this set a while back, and my impression was that the blue pins were used in the chassis, while the black ones were used in the bodywork.

Cool picture! So in this one at least we do have two different colors of gear--it would make more sense for these to be the final colors than that orange/red, since they're different from each other, and from preexisting red gears. I really, really hope for 14/18, since the 4n+2 gears would open up plenty of new possibilities for gearboxes.

I'm glad to see some official recognition for discussion of CADA in this limited way! (It makes more sense than the way we were using Brunoj1's Supercar topic as an unofficial one!)

I guess we're getting off topic, but I suppose that could be useful for PTOs and the like, so maybe I'll model one sometime; I don't know.

An adapter between driving ring and axle would be extremely useful sometimes, but as @SNIPE says, it couldn't work in a single stud thickness, because it would need to stabilize two disconnected axles. I recently designed and 3D printed a part that works nicely in these scenarios, looking like this:

Another possibility is that these gears are simply 16/20T gears without any special features except for the spur-style teeth. These alone should allow for chain compatibility, which would be nice, and ought to allow for at least a bit better efficiency, since their side profile isn't rubbing supporting beams as much. This would be largely a waste of a mold, but could happen nonetheless.

I don't have a scale like that, for one, though I suppose in a pinch one could add up the weight by using the listed weights on Bricklink.

We could do an unfinished MOC contest! No entry may be more than 53% complete!

Nice and compact! I'm not sure if you'd have quite enough ground clearance, but in order to get rid of that CADA part you could try replacing it with a 32184, and then replace the 1/2 and 3/4 pins with the 22484 bar with towball jammed in as far as possible.

Looking at the summer 2016 wave (and the Arocs) in catalogs was part of what inspired me to get into Technic in the first place!

I suppose it's easier to be supportive when it's not your own garage and life savings at stake...

Thanks! Do we have a specific date yet, or no?

That's entirely possible, and those gears would be welcome too, but I think it would be a bit odd for them to give up their beveled sides. True, it would very seldom be useful to have them, but it wouldn't hurt, would help distinguish them from other gears, would be useful to allow people with smaller collections to repurpose them, and would probably be easier to design, since the existing profile can be kept. Kind of like on the 20T clutch gear, which rarely needs the bevels (though it probably does more often than this gear would), but kept them anyways. Also, while you're right that these gears wouldn't fit well into the existing system (except maybe in a spacing in a 3x3 L shape, with the hypotenuse being just slightly under 4 studs), the fact that both gears are the same, unusual, color could be meant to denote a new system, which isn't meant to be especially compatible with other gears. I think I'm arguing more out of vain hope, though, and knowing Lego, I should probably prepare for disappointment. So, do we know when reviews for this set will be out?

You have some good points there; the round "rims" on the edge rule out the existing 16T gears, I think, and you're right, they really don't look like the same size, though I try not to underestimate the power of illusion. I can't see why they would use frictionless ones in this model, though they could be useful elsewhere. I'm somewhat hopeful that you're right about them being a 14/18T gear setup, especially after taking a close zoom-in on the gear in the picture. I count 7 teeth visible on the side of the gear exposed to us, while eyeballing a 16T gear seems to reveal one more tooth to a look from that perspective. Man I'd get excited about new gear sizes! Especially if they put clutch gear variants of these in the Ferrari--that would make me drool.

I don't think there'd be a connection between the PF remote and the normal Buwizz outputs; it seems to me that you're just running the receivers off of the normal constant-voltage output on all RC PF-platform outputs, similar to the old trick of running a PF receiver off of the output of a second receiver. Likewise, you can run an IR receiver off of the outputs of various Chinese-make RC hubs (I've tested CADA and Mould King) to add two outputs, while still having the original one work normally. I think this connection has to be there on the Buwizz to make the wiring for PF Servos work properly, and has the pleasant side effect of letting receivers work properly, rather than being an intentional design. I could be wrong, though!

Well, if you ran the IR receiver off of the Buwizz I don't think it's outputs would be connected to the PU outputs of the Buwizz. Now, if you used either two PF extension wires connected via 9V (or one of the non-9V-adapting Chinese extension wires) to connect the output of the receiver to one of the PF outputs of the Buwizz, I suppose it could theoretically read that signal as something to control the PU, but that would require a bunch of new programming, I assume. Is that what you were thinking?

That's very interesting! How grippy is it compared to original Lego tires?

It makes sense on an aesthetically focused model like this, but also seems hard to do in practice, having to hold up the panels with some preliminary chassis. It sure works out nice, though!

I think the cost of the build just went from one million to two! Those bases cost an arm and a leg!

My thought is that even the biggest trusses used in Lego cranes won't be big enough for this, so perhaps you'll need two or more "levels" of trusses. Basically, I'd try building a bunch of big conventional trusses with good longitudinal stiffness, and then pretend that those are normal liftarms and build a larger model of the same truss using little trusses as the component parts. Maybe connect the smaller trusses using 60T turntables?

I agree those must be new parts--though they seem kind of pointless, or at least far down on my priority list for new parts... Looks like it's got the screw-in PU hub, as expected. Are those paint-roller parts for the "steering wheel"-type thing on the blue side?

Liking the multi-speed gearbox! Kind of like 2016's Race Kart in that way, but better in other ways.

This is a fairly simple Technic clock I built recently for the challenge of it. For those of you who are familiar with Lego clocks, most of its features will be familiar, except for the auto-rewind, which used a mechanism I hadn't seen before. Features: Auto-rewind Hour hand Minute hand Second hand The basic clock mechanism was based on a long one-second period pendulum, which operated an escapement I copied from this video: after which I modified it to increase reliability. Mine looked like this: Because it works on a 40T gear, some gearing was needed to get the correct motion of the second hand, so I did a 16:24 gear ratio using a chain to make one tick of one second equal one sixtieth of a rotation. The second hand was driven by its axle, the minute hand was driven by a differential housing, and the hour hand was driven by a 56T turntable. The weight used was a disposable water bottle, since water has the two crucial characteristics of being cheap and heavy. The weight ran a winch through the spider gears of a differential to run the clock, while a PF L-motor was hooked up to the carrier gear of the differential to allow for auto-rewind. Originally I had planned on using a PU L-motor and a Pybricks program to set the program to rewind the weight every x minutes, but this wasn't a very elegant or accurate solution, so I looked into some other things. The solution I set on involved having a PF switch on the side of the clock and a string tied from it to the weight. This meant that the switch got pulled on by the weight whenever the string became taut, causing the rewind to start. I then needed a way to shut off the motor at the right time, which was done using another string which went down from the weight, around a pulley, back up above the switch, around another pulley, and then downwards to the switch. This caused the string to become taut and pull the switch back up when it reached the top of its travel. The clock's biggest failings were in accuracy. I had a small linear actuator in the pendulum to adjust it's period minutely, but I couldn't get it to give me accurate results. Additionally, I found that while the motor was winding up the weight the pendulum would start swinging faster, throwing off the time. At the end of the day, it doesn't really affect me because I took the clock apart almost immediately (I needed my 11x15 frames to build a copy of the Sian), but it was still disappointing. Here's some extra pictures. I'm pretty tight for space in my dorm room, so this was about the only place I could have it set up, resulting in a rather messy background for the pictures. Here's my video: More images here: https://bricksafe.com/pages/2GodBDGlory/clock